Total Pageviews

Friday, October 14, 2011

Wedding Garment and Torture 4

Having looked at how Luke shaped the parable yesterday, we are now ready to see how Matthew (22:1ff) has done the same.

The first thing we notice is that Matthew has placed the parable much later in the Jesus story. It follows after His entrance into Jerusalem. Jesus rides in, fulfilling Scripture, prophetically cleans and then heals the blind and lame in the Temple. The day culminates in Jesus defending the children who have called Him the Messiah (Son of David).

The next day, in the morning, a hungry Jesus curses a fig tree. (Mark says the next day it is found withered up, while Matthew indicates it happens immediately.) This prophetic image (the tree is Jerusalem, temple and people) sets up an angry exchange as the Jewish leaders demand to know the source of Jesus' authority. He asks them a question in turn, was John the Baptist from God? The leaders, aware that they are being set up, declare that they do not know. Jesus says, "I will not tell you either." What is noteworthy is Mark and Luke share this same basic narrative flow to this point. Like Matthew, they have the parable of the landowner next, but Matthew has created a different context for that parbable.

He has sandwiched the parable of the landowner between two other parables. The first, which occurs only in Matthew, is about two sons. A father asks them to do something, one says yes, the other no. The one who said yes does not follow through, while the one who said no repents and does what he is asked. Jesus then declares that tax collectors and prostitutes will enter the Kingdom ahead of the Jewish leaders (who reject Him). John the Baptist is a preacher from God whom the sinners trusted. This theme, the conversion of the lost and outcast, is a key to our parable.

Next, the parable of the landowner, is about fruits (refer to the cursed fig tree). It is also about the son of the owner being killed. Matthew rearranges the words. In his Gospel they take the son out of the vineyard and killed him. (This minor detail seems significant as it conforms to the death of Jesus, who was crucified outside the city) The parable ends with the threat that the owner will kill the tenants and replace them with other people who will produce. A not so veiled reference to the outsiders previously mentioned.

Finally, we get to our parable of the wedding garment. It is only found in Matthew and Luke. Mark does not have it. As we saw yesterday, Luke places it earlier in the Gospel in a meal setting. Matthew uses it here. The setting is the first major change. Matthew has others.

Luke's parable, about a man having dinner, is expanded in Matthew. Now it is a king having a wedding feast for his son. It is an allegory. Earlier in the Gospel Jesus identifies Himself as the groom. The wedding feast is a dominant image in the Apocalypse for the Kingdom. Matthew, using images from Jesus, now adds another layer to the parable. It is also an allegory about salvation history. Matthew adds others slaves to Lukes single one. The group of slaves goes out in two groups (representing OT prophets and Christian prophets). The second group are given the excuses but it is summarized briefly (one goes to his farm, another to his business) with an amazing addition. Now the rest, we read, harm and kill the messengers.

This is a turn which makes little sense in the original parable (about rejected invitations). Now, Matthew's allegory is in full force. It is about rejection of the King (God). It is about harming and killing His servants (the prophets). It is about what has been taking place since the beginning of Israel. It is about the death of the Son (tied back to the previous parable of the vineyard).

What follows, the destruction of the city, reflects actual history. Jesus' prophetic warning to Jerusalem is encapsulated here. Matthew is speaking to his church, reminding them of the warning Jesus gave (and the real life destruction of the real city). So, when the King says, afterward, the food is on the table, get others to eat, we understand that what makes no sense in the parable (how can one have time to fight a war while food sits on the table) is actually directed to us.

But Matthew makes two other additions. While Luke identifies the outcast as invitees, Matthew says those gathered are "good and bad." Matthew is more focused on the morals of the church. He is also focused on the final judgment. There is no escape from that. We are accountable. The church, even in his time, was a mixed group. Throughout the Gospel there are warnings about this. The church is not "all saints, all holy, all pure." It is a mixed bag.

The man without a wedding garment represents those within the church who have been "saved by grace" but have been unfaithful. He was invited in for no reason beyond the King's kindness. However, Matthew wants it made clear (as clear as Paul makes it in Romans) that the offer of grace is not without expectation. "Where is your wedding garment?" the King asks.

This question is not logical in the flow of the parable. How could someone scooped up off the streets be prepared?  My guess it is a teaching of Jesus from another setting which has found its way here. Matthew is less concerned with the past, when Jesus explained how God's offer extends to include the outcast. Matthew wants to focus the church's attention on God's demand of righteousness (to them). The wedding garment, as is indicated in the Apocalypse and interpreted by the Church Fathers, is our righteousness. Judgment.

So the speechless man, he has no defense, is cast out. An image (horrible and terrifying) of the Last Judgment. This is not an act of senseless torture, though it originally seems to be. Instead, it is Matthews taking a turn. His image of Jesus shines through. His warning to the church is clear.

We cannot earn salvation, but without fruits, we can buy damnation. That is the rest of the story. Another angle on the message of Jesus. I hope I have given some insight into how imporant comparing the Gospels is and how helpful it is to look at the context to hear the message.
i will not be blogging for most of the next week. God bless!

1 comment:

  1. This is a remarkable series. Not just because of the insights into a particular difficult story. But because you have shown insights into how to regard the scriptures for our own study of this and other stories, parables, and teachings. It's a look at the methodology.

    Thank you

    ReplyDelete